Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorRadford, Ken_US
dc.contributor.authorSutton, Cen_US
dc.contributor.authorSach, Ten_US
dc.contributor.authorHolmes, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorWatkins, Cen_US
dc.contributor.authorForshaw, Den_US
dc.contributor.authorJones, Ten_US
dc.contributor.authorHoffman, Ken_US
dc.contributor.authorO'Connor, Ren_US
dc.contributor.authorTyerman, Ren_US
dc.contributor.authorMerchán-Baeza, JAen_US
dc.contributor.authorMorris, Ren_US
dc.contributor.authorMcManus, Een_US
dc.contributor.authorDrummond, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorWalker, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorDuley, Len_US
dc.contributor.authorShakespeare, Den_US
dc.contributor.authorHammond, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorPhillips, Jen_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-27T09:25:22Z
dc.date.issued2018-05en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/handle/123456789/59339
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Up to 160,000 people incur traumatic brain injury (TBI) each year in the UK. TBI can have profound effects on many areas of human functioning, including participation in work. There is limited evidence of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of vocational rehabilitation (VR) after injury to promote early return to work (RTW) following TBI. OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of a definitive, multicentre, randomised controlled trial (RCT) of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of early, specialist VR plus usual care (UC) compared with UC alone on work retention 12 months post TBI. DESIGN: A multicentre, feasibility, parallel-group RCT with a feasibility economic evaluation and an embedded mixed-methods process evaluation. Randomisation was by remote computer-generated allocation. SETTING: Three NHS major trauma centres (MTCs) in England. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with TBI admitted for > 48 hours and working or studying prior to injury. INTERVENTIONS: Early specialist TBI VR delivered by occupational therapists (OTs) in the community using a case co-ordination model. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported RTW 12 months post randomisation, mood, functional ability, participation, work self-efficacy, quality of life and work ability. Feasibility outcomes included recruitment and retention rates. Follow-up was by postal questionnaires in two centres and face to face in one centre. Those collecting data were blind to treatment allocation. RESULTS: Out of 102 target participants, 78 were recruited (39 randomised to each arm), representing 39% of those eligible and 5% of those screened. Approximately 2.2 patients were recruited per site per month. Of those, 56% had mild injuries, 18% had moderate injuries and 26% had severe injuries. A total of 32 out of 45 nominated carers were recruited. A total of 52 out of 78 (67%) TBI participants responded at 12 months (UC, n = 23; intervention, n = 29), completing 90% of the work questions; 21 out of 23 (91%) UC respondents and 20 out of 29 (69%) intervention participants returned to work at 12 months. Two participants disengaged from the intervention. Face-to-face follow-up was no more effective than postal follow-up. RTW was most strongly related to social participation and work self-efficacy. It is feasible to assess the cost-effectiveness of VR. Intervention was delivered as intended and valued by participants. Factors likely to affect a definitive trial include deploying experienced OTs, no clear TBI definition or TBI registers, and repatriation of more severe TBI from MTCs, affecting recruitment of those most likely to benefit/least likely to drop out. LIMITATIONS: Target recruitment was not reached, but mechanisms to achieve this in future studies were identified. Retention was lower than expected, particularly in UC, potentially biasing estimates of the 12-month RTW rate. CONCLUSIONS: This study met most feasibility objectives. The intervention was delivered with high fidelity. When objectives were not met, strategies to ensure feasibility of a full trial were identified. Future work should test two-stage recruitment and include resources to recruit from 'spokes'. A broader measure covering work ability, self-efficacy and participation may be a more sensitive outcome. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN38581822. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 33. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipNational Institute for Health Research (NIHR).
dc.description.sponsorshipHTA programme project number 11/66/02
dc.format.extent1 - 124en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.ispartofHealth Technol Assessen_US
dc.subjectActivities of Daily Livingen_US
dc.subjectAdolescenten_US
dc.subjectAdulten_US
dc.subjectBrain Injuries, Traumaticen_US
dc.subjectCost-Benefit Analysisen_US
dc.subjectEnglanden_US
dc.subjectFemaleen_US
dc.subjectHealth Resourcesen_US
dc.subjectHumansen_US
dc.subjectMaleen_US
dc.subjectMental Healthen_US
dc.subjectMiddle Ageden_US
dc.subjectOccupational Therapyen_US
dc.subjectQuality of Lifeen_US
dc.subjectRehabilitation, Vocationalen_US
dc.subjectResearch Designen_US
dc.subjectReturn to Worken_US
dc.subjectSelf Efficacyen_US
dc.subjectSocial Participationen_US
dc.subjectTime Factorsen_US
dc.subjectTrauma Centersen_US
dc.subjectTrauma Severity Indicesen_US
dc.subjectYoung Adulten_US
dc.titleEarly, specialist vocational rehabilitation to facilitate return to work after traumatic brain injury: the FRESH feasibility RCT.en_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.holder© Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO 2018
dc.identifier.doi10.3310/hta22330en_US
pubs.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29863459en_US
pubs.issue33en_US
pubs.notesNot knownen_US
pubs.publication-statusPublisheden_US
pubs.volume22en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record